Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 81 to 110 of 110

Thread: Masculinization of woman

  1. #81

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    3,359
    Mentioned
    109 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Masculine women are....fine by me. Some can be quite attractive and sweet, especially the ones with strong thighs .There is no correct way to Exist or Be in this vast, indifferent, yet sublime, universe.

  2. #82
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    I think you are just into her Fe HA
    I think he just finds her hot. His duals can't be hot because they are holy angels straight from heaven here only to born his children and fluff... er...protect his...ego...and submit to his will...words, as truth.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  3. #83
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Ah, we are on the same page! I wonder about your intent sometimes, too. Well I had only just come up with that picture for another post for you, and then I saw this thread with "masculine" and "women" in the topic - a coincidence since that is what I just wrote to you about. I skimmed through it, and my eye went right to your lower quote - so I reused the picture, because it was funny. (Funny because it was literal, while your statement was likely more esoteric).

    Hope that helps.
    Not related to your post here but since I saw you I wanted to ask something. Did you realize that according to Filatova, at least, EII is called "The Psychologist" and IEE "The Initiator"? I found that interesting since I have seen you and others refer to IEE as the psychologist. I believe Strat and Meged both use the term "The Psychologist" for IEE. Not sure who started it.

    The book also calls all NFs Humanists not just EII.

    The book also says IEE have little respect for social norms and if you ask them to stand on their head or draw a crocodile they will do it. Is that true?

    This is a description of the general appearance. Do you relate?


    https://www.amazon.com/Understanding...sr=1-1-catcorr

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  4. #84
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,672
    Mentioned
    251 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Aylen, I relate to some, so I will take it a bit of a time with what you wrote, and look at it in pieces. I think it is not so hard for an IEE to talk about herself, so thanks for the invite.

    [I have been intensely car-shopping these past weeks for the best possible buy on a car, on a tight budget at a bad time financially to need a car, but I do need one, and we are in the homestretch having signed papers today (my son is driving down to FL on spring break to get it), and this is a refreshingly different thing to think about after intensely immersing in car-world for too long!]

    [The thorough, long answers here are based on the supposition that the psychologist/humanist aspect of the NF of your INFp might find it interesting...]

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Not related to your post here but since I saw you I wanted to ask something. Did you realize that according to Filatova, at least, EII is called "The Psychologist" and IEE "The Initiator"? I found that interesting since I have seen you and others refer to IEE as the psychologist. I believe Strat and Meged both use the term "The Psychologist" for IEE. Not sure who started it.
    I particularly am drawn to Meged's work of all those you mentioned, and have not been particularly drawn to the others except something Strat wrote I think on psychological issues of types.... I have heard before of EII referred to as Psychologist, but I didn't know this was from Filatova. When I think of my close EII friend, I can see how she could be called Psychologist, but in a different way than me. I would say the depth of my psychological understanding goes deep to a broader range of people, and hers goes deeper in a small range, particularly those in her very close circle. She seems to have a very functional understanding of those in her family and day to day life and is great at using psychology on them. Whereas sometimes my understanding of others does not seem that functional - it's just understanding.

    I should also say when my EII friend got her nursing degree, they thought she excelled in her psychiatric ward rotation, which did not surprise me.

    As to the term "Initiator", I don't relate to that super quickly but don't discount it either. Especially at various times in the past, in reflection, I have felt there has been a pattern of my lacking initiation in relationships, acting more often as a responder the majority of the time, like, it seems so many of my friendships happen because someone else reached out and I responded. Some of my closest friends over the years would be the EII friend I mentioned - I think she decided we would be friends after meeting me. She is a family member by marriage and I would say an EII, once they "pick" you, is a true friend indeed. Also my LSE friend best friend in high school initiated our friendship, a penpal friend I had that I met on vacation when I was a child was a friendship she initiated, two close ESE friends, one in high school and one in college were initiated by them and I responded, and back in college it seems I dated SLEs a lot, because they are such initiators. I also dated 2 SLI's; these were lightly but sweetly lovely exclusive romantic relationships and in both cases they initiated it and also they played a role in the context I met them in as an experienced confident/leader in the area we were in. And my first husband was ESE, was initiator, and I responded. I guess also I have been very much an initiator in my own life; I make things happen as far as what I think I should be doing. I feel like I do initiating in my relationship/marriage/life with my SLI husband, more than ever in my life, especially because he supports that.

    So for that term I have mixed reviews!

    [Warning, what follows is a long sidetrack...]

    Back to dating... I feel women have a sort of drawing power, and I remember avoiding gazes, in order to not draw attention when I hadn't thought it through that I wanted attention (or did not return the interest, I suppose). Because in returning the gaze, just even briefly before looking away, it seems one can psychologically draw the object of one's interest to you, just with your heart or inner longing, even if you do not look at them again. I remember at a certain time of my life being enamoured with the realization of this phenomena, and I began to feel as if the world was my oyster, and then, realizing something was wrong with this, and that I was ashamed of this, in that one can lead others to hope where it is none, and I came to a realization that I had been drawing others to me just for my own ego, not for what was good for them. I repented of this, and began a habit that still lingers of avoiding much direct eye contact to strangers of the opposite sex... Perhaps this was enforced when I married my first husband, not wanting anyone to think I was single or available.

    So avoiding gazes became a habit, and also my first confession to a Priest, before entering the Catholic Church, as an adult, included confessing of and repenting for those earlier times when i felt I purposely drew persons of the opposite sex to me not because I loved, but because I loved to be loved. I see that as a form of using a people. [Is drawing others to you, in a womanly fashion, so that you can then respond, really "initiating"?].

    Fast forward to many years later, after years of being married to an oppressive man and walking on eggshells all those years, after the trauma of that and the heightened trauma of divorce and the challenges of beings a single mom, to a stellar day, a big turning point, a before/after sort of day - the day Jesus healed me, the day He made me whole. The method of His healing was 4 hours of extensive and intensive deliverance prayer between a minister and me, led by this minister for this purpose, prayers to heal all past hurts and stresses and traumas - all the way back to birth, and even beyond, to inherited generational sins. All of that was swept away, cleansed away for good, forever, leaving me truly like a whole, new, clean creation. The minister who prayed for me said with a sort of astonishment that I was positively glowing, and I felt it, and was a bit embarrassed but could not hide it. At a brief meeting on the way home I met and fell unexpectedly (it felt almost "against my will") in love with my longtime correspondence friend who is now my husband.

    I returned to my state/town, and it must have been days later that I stopped at a gas station and went inside to pay. I still had the glow, I guess, as all of life seemed new and amazingly wonderful, and my heart sang all the time. I remember seeing a man going in also - my age, perhaps, and I do remember looking away or down, avoiding any possible gaze. And when I got inside, in line with others also waiting, the man suddenly began to shout at me and I was struck in shock. Apparently he had opened the door for me and I had not thanked him. This had insulted him deeply, and he was very angry. I sensed he had probably been insulted elsewhere in his life by women/a woman, and had some deep hurt like his wife leaving and/or disrespecting him, and I reminded him of it, like a bad, bad trigger, and he was having it out, all of it out, on me.

    Such a shocking event reminds me as I remember it that my often go-to way of being in public, of ignoring others while being too much in my own world, needs to be revised. On the other hand, in a social setting that I am comfortable in for whatever reason, I become, as you describe below, one who can "... socialize easily, giving the impression they are always ready for precarious adventures, new acquaintances, and exciting encounters".


    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    The book also calls all NFs Humanists not just EII.
    I can see that. Just different reflections and focuses of humanists.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    The book also says IEE have little respect for social norms and if you ask them to stand on their head or draw a crocodile they will do it. Is that true?
    LOL. Only sort of. If I felt like standing on my head and drawing a crocodile I just would. Other times I do not want to draw attention to myself. I would have to feel the good will of the people around me to let my guard down. I feel like generally I do care about social norms and like to fit in. I relax more in a small group.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    This is a description of the general appearance. Do you relate?
    The initiators air implies some kind of gaiety
    Yes, this can be me at times, when i am engaged in the gathering, to be sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    They don't restrain their emotions
    I definitely have a hard time masking my emotions especially particularly when they take me by surprise. There are too many times when I see people's eyes responding with recognition and interest in seeing exactly what I am feeling when I would prefer to not be seen and not be read, and I know its my own fault for letting it show (not that I can help it) on my face. Yet I would say that OFTEN I restrain my emotions, at least when i am able, because I would rather deal with them on my own (get alone and figure them out because half the time I do not understand them when they come upon me) than deal with them in front of others. I guess I prefer to be candid and open - until I wish I was closed and unreadable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    their face is attractive due to merry, dancing eyes
    Yes, I see this, as my smile is complimented a lot. (I don't remember that so much as a child. I think I was a plain child and unexpectedly blossomed in adolescence). Editing to add: yes, it is probably most often when I smile or am happy that I am told I am attractive and the rest of the time I am more ordinary.


    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Initiators socialize easily, giving the impression they are always ready for precarious adventures, new acquaintances, and exciting encounters
    I am not always like this, but I can definitely be fully like this at times.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Women of this psychological type love bright jewelry
    I would not say that phrase of myself, but I could make a different, yet similar statement about me and jewelry. (Though I don't wear as much jewelry now, as I have developed an increasing love of simplicity). You could say I have a love of jewelry that I discover to be exactly what I think is beautiful or my style. I a enamoured when i find a piece that beautiful and "exactly me". I always prefer just a very few pieces, just one two or three things that are just right. Same with my color palate in general. I am more particular and choosy about colors and textures than anyone I know, and maybe also drape; I enjoy putting thought into the harmony of that. Yet one would no one would describe me as a sophisticated dresser, or a striking one, just as no one would describe my style or my jewelry as flamboyant or "bright"). And I do dress "forgetfully" sometimes, as they say of IEE.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    plump African lips and wide spherical eyes
    LOL! I can see how that might be a bit IEE, and it makes me think of the description of my (Kibbe's) style-type, which is "Soft Classic" (or probably "Charismatics Soft Classic" (basically a Classic with Romantic added) The physical description of my type is described as sometimes with fuller lips and larger eyes. But my features are more classically sized and proportioned, with a woman's typically somewhat smaller eyes (not small, just smaller than men's), and when not smiling they are roundish (my cheek apples when smiling push them up and change the shape a bit). My lips are not plumply African, and also not thin, more just regular proportion. In young womanhood I was often considered rather pretty, and I suppose at times I still am, though I was never a great beauty by any means. Once, in a new dorm after just transferring colleges (at a time when i surely looked my best, a lovely time I fondly remember, that I never had again, when I spent five full mornings a week taking dance classes), I had some black suitemates who kept to themselves and seemed to desire or be more comfortable only with black friends (or, maybe my quiet ways, which were cultural, from my family life, put them off), and I had just stepped out of the shower, in the bathroom, and one of those girls was there and staring at me in a studied way in the mirror, and then she said in a blunt, candid way - not to be mean, but just saying her thoughts quite openly - something like, "Why, you're just normal!" Sort of like it was a disappointing discovery? As in - not a great beauty! And I thought, well, yes I am. Only at times, I could seem more. And I guess that was for her a moment of seeing the truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Initiators can keep a group of friendly contacts around them, keeping pleasant open relations.
    Well, I guess I can, and I need to remember that this is me, and that to do this is important to me, and so I need to remember to initiate the work to make it happen. But there is also this other side of me that is the reserved one, the side that probably made those suitemates in college feel I was an off-putting person, maybe. Sometimes I am just too focused on myself and the challenges I am currently faced with. Like, last year at this time I was suddenly in a position as a teacher in a school for a semester and the other teacher in my department was new, too, only arriving a month before me, similar in age, just a few years older. Like me she was starting back after raising a child/children, and it was a very challenging school and a very challenging position to come into chaos in the middle of a year into a mess of a classroom (we replaced just-retired teachers who were long overdue for retirement) at a school notorious for behavior challenges. I was intensely focused on the job at hand, and, in that, I must have been off-putting to my colleague, at least this one, without realizing it. Boy, did she give me the cold shoulder. She also buddied with the part-timers in our department who came in to teach a class each while she was free and I was not, and I know she spoke disdainfully of me to them because I could "feel" it, and her baffling dislike (not spelled out, just heavy in the air) was a deeply painful daily cross to bear. I just shouldered it and carried on. We did need to interact sometimes. Well, sometime in the last month or more, suddenly, seemingly out of nowhere, she did a complete about-face. She showed enthusiastic interest in me, and genuine camaraderie. At first is was so astounding it was hard to trust, but I did accept her new friendliness. And suddenly we were (on certain occasions) co-teaching our classes, where we had the classes competing in games (these were her ideas but they were good ones and I got on board). Since we had never talked about her dislike, I never talked about her new "like", but once I must have of alluded to it and she interjected enthusiastically, "You grew on me!". So, other than that being a mystery, what I did learn from it is that I can be off-putting by probably being too closed-off and ignoring of others when I am too much into myself or whatever I am immersed in, and I need to check that around people. (To excuse myself, the position was a huge challenge that I poured myself into).

    I hope you are in the mood for a long, thorough answer to your Q's. But I think you read fast and can handle it!
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  5. #85
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    2,174
    Mentioned
    150 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    I think he just finds her hot. His duals can't be hot because they are holy angels straight from heaven here only to born his children and fluff... er...protect his...ego...and submit to his will...words, as truth.
    LOL that you included that.

    Well it is a good thing that angels are already dead because anybody would die if they took @Sol 's advice/words as truth LoL.

  6. #86

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,198
    Mentioned
    1012 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    His duals can't be hot because they are holy angels straight from heaven here only to born his children and fluff... er...protect his...ego...and submit to his will...words, as truth.
    To born children helps to be sexually attractive.
    When a woman is pleasant as a person this not only helps to get closer relations, but also to get higher sexual interest with higher general feeling of love.

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    well it is a good thing that angels are already dead
    the term "angel" means "messanger"
    alike you get a vision where a dude tells you something important, or acts through your intuition, or influences on your thoughts directly

    angels are eternal in religious fairytales. the same like peoples' spiritual essence - their souls

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    anybody would die if they took Sol's advice/words as truth
    people [as a kind] will die if women will not born children or will do it not good enough being not enough feminine but more masculine than should
    Last edited by Sol; 03-24-2019 at 05:45 PM.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  7. #87
    Bento's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To born, or not to born: that is the question:
    Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
    The people will die if women not born children,
    Or will do it not good enough being not,
    Enough feminine but more masculine than should

    Hamlet, Act III, Scene I

  8. #88
    2real Remiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Can'-Ka No Rey
    TIM
    Ni-ILI 468 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,909
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    False. You exactly need to lift to be able to get thicc.


    Active women <3
    "The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools." ―Thucydides



  9. #89
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Funny thing to consider that while we now believe that "thin is in" the fertility goddesses of old most certainly did not.
    You mean like this?



    ...Wow, it's almost like there were different types of women (and men) back then. (Pic is Artemis/Diana)
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  10. #90
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    To born children helps to be sexually attractive.
    When a woman is pleasant as a person this not only helps to get closer relations, but also to get higher sexual interest with higher general feeling of love.


    the term "angel" means "messanger"
    alike you get a vision where a dude tells you something important, or acts through your intuition, or influences on your thoughts directly

    angels are eternal in religious fairytales. the same like peoples' spiritual essence - their souls


    people [as a kind] will die if women will not born children or will do it not good enough being not enough feminine but more masculine than should
    With over 7 billion people on the planet I am not too concerned about a lack of breeding and more concerned with a lack of balance. Earth will work that out though by getting rid of people now and then, through natural disasters. She will not be overrun by an invasive species that does nothing to maintain the natural order (cycles) and balance of life.

    Edit: If people want modern medicine and tech to live longer (or some want forever) they might want to think before having large families. I don't want to live forever. Not in this form or in a physical reality.
    Last edited by Aylen; 03-24-2019 at 09:20 PM.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  11. #91

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,198
    Mentioned
    1012 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    With over 7 billion people on the planet I am not too concerned about a lack of breeding
    There are no rational limits for breeding as the technology solved this problem before. The universe is enough place for all. Also in the past people lived in more material poverty but were not lesser happy - what shift material limits further than it seems. You can feel good without many things in your life, but you can't without love.
    There is a lack of love to people. Today egocentric ideology indoctrinated to masses leads to the hate to people and hence to born new ones. It's what is the real loss. It's part of peoples' nature the wish to born new people. Of healthy nature. Anything other is the pervertion which leads people to be unhappy.

    What is the sense in having more expensive things and more of them if you feel worse, lesser happy? When the love is lost, the inner harmony, the natural part of which is to born children. The egocentric ideology have stolen this from people. Also with more natural attitude - people could do more to have better material region. Many resources goes away due to egocentrism as people do not care about others as could and due to intersocial conflicts with this egocentrism.

    The peoples quantity is not the real problem. The perverion of peoples' psyche and socium by egocentric ideology - is the far more problem. While the talks about "there are too much of people" is more the rationalization of hate to people than other.

    I was born in other culture - USSR collectivism. It's easier for me to see the situation differently.
    You need to think to understand what I've said. Medias propaganda is not easy to overcome.
    I have nothing to add still.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  12. #92
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    There are no rational limits for breeding as the technology solved this problem before. The universe is enough place for all. Also in the past people lived in more material poverty but were not lesser happy - what shift material limits further than it seems. You can feel good without many things in your life, but you can't without love.
    There is a lack of love to people. Today egocentric ideology indoctrinated to masses leads to the hate to people and hence to born new ones. It's what is the real loss. It's part of peoples' nature the wish to born new people. Of healthy nature. Anything other is the pervertion which leads people to be unhappy.

    What is the sense in having more expensive things and more of them if you feel worse, lesser happy? When the love is lost, the inner harmony, the natural part of which is to born children. The egocentric ideology have stolen this from people. Also with more natural attitude - people could do more to have better material region. Many resources goes away due to egocentrism as people do not care about others as could and due to intersocial conflicts with this egocentrism.

    The peoples quantity is not the real problem. The perverion of peoples' psyche and socium by egocentric ideology - is the far more problem. While the talks about "there are too much of people" is more the rationalization of hate to people than other.

    I was born in other culture - USSR collectivism. It's easier for me to see the situation differently.
    You need to think to understand what I've said. Medias propaganda is not easy to overcome.
    I have nothing to add still.
    This is not about love. Love is more than this narrow idea of man + woman = children. It is not about media propaganda either. These are things I concluded on my own without much influence from others.

    People who can't afford 1 child should think carefully before having 10 of them. That is what is best for the "collective". I don't care how many you or anyone else have. Just take care of them. Some people don't take care of their kids and abuse them in a variety of ways. Others just want to force their own beliefs on them to the point of narcissistically making carbon copies of themselves in order to live vicariously through them. They do not encourage them to have imagination, express their feelings and think for themselves.

    I am happy with the parents I got. They weren't perfect but they taught us all how to think for ourselves, look out for and love each other and how to cooperate. My immediate family is very loving toward each other by actions and words. My parents mostly by their actions. In this day there is little excuse to be a bad parent. I know it is on the job training but seriously learn some basic skills first. Like how to take care of yourself first.

    I would not think much of a parent who used socionics on their child tbh. It would not be a very loving thing to do until the child was old enough to understand it as theory. Before that it is important to just let them be kids, explore and keep them from dying. Not to indoctrinate them.

    I agree the planet could support more human beings if they got it together. War and starvation is not having it together. Like I said, there are forces to balance out an excess of human beings. War, famine, natural disasters are just a part of balancing it out.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  13. #93
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Like I said, there are forces to balance out an excess of human beings. War, famine, natural disasters are just a part of balancing it out.
    I wouldn't call any human beings excess. It's one thing to look at a human being and think that they're vile or worthless and want to throw a brick through their head, but it's another to look at a list of statistics on human life and consider a number of arbitrarily or not so arbitrarily chosen human lives worthless.
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  14. #94
    2real Remiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Can'-Ka No Rey
    TIM
    Ni-ILI 468 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,909
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    I wouldn't call any human beings excess. It's one thing to look at a human being and think that they're vile or worthless and want to throw a brick through their head, but it's another to look at a list of statistics on human life and consider a number of arbitrarily or not so arbitrarily chosen human lives worthless.
    Nature is not subject to your morals.
    "The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools." ―Thucydides



  15. #95
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    I wouldn't call any human beings excess. It's one thing to look at a human being and think that they're vile or worthless and want to throw a brick through their head, but it's another to look at a list of statistics on human life and consider a number of arbitrarily or not so arbitrarily chosen human lives worthless.
    My response had nothing to do with statistics. I am not inclined to explain it further than that since it would require sharing a deeper philosophy that I am not comfortable sharing on the forum. I don't find humans, as a whole, particularly vile or worthless though.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  16. #96
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Remiel View Post
    Nature is not subject to your morals.
    It's not nature if it involves human decision on any level.
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  17. #97
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    My response had nothing to do with statistics. I am not inclined to explain it further than that since it would require sharing a deeper philosophy that I am not comfortable sharing on the forum. I don't find humans, as a whole, particularly vile or worthless though.
    Don't keep us waiting until the next episode!
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  18. #98
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    455
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    It's not nature if it involves human decision on any level.
    We are inside an aquarium and every bit still a part of nature. Just a little amped up, the great game changers. Exactly what mother nature. What else was going to stir the global pot and switch things up?

  19. #99
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    455
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    My response had nothing to do with statistics. I am not inclined to explain it further than that since it would require sharing a deeper philosophy that I am not comfortable sharing on the forum. I don't find humans, as a whole, particularly vile or worthless though.
    I get it, I think. There is a long game here and we are playing our role.

  20. #100
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finaplex View Post
    We are inside an aquarium and every bit still a part of nature. Just a little amped up, the great game changers. Exactly what mother nature. What else was going to stir the global pot and switch things up?
    Maybe you're part of nature but I'm not. I'm definitely not inside an aquarium. Anyways, what do you think human beings were put on Earth for? Something that's simply transitory doesn't have any meaningful power or purpose and I think you should know that. I'm going to be the queen of humility here but I know more than most people would ever want to, so I should probably just not argue.
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  21. #101
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baking bread
    TIM
    ESTp 7w8 Sx/Sp
    Posts
    3,323
    Mentioned
    212 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lelelewomanwomanwoman View Post
    The social norms are pretty black and white now and there aren't very many attractive girly men, like I've seen like 1 or so in my entire life. Minus traps, but idk bout that. And the many gender movement has bad stigma attached.

    In Austin powers international man of mystery, austin powers tackled an older woman and exclaimed, "this is a man, baby!".

    I got to thinking that if Austin powers, who was from the past 1960s or so, was used to women who looked more feminine, and mistaken a woman in the modern era 1990s for a male in disguise. Are the women more manly looking now?
    Maybe, but as long as men keep being attracted to them I dont think it matters. Whats "feminine" anyway, 50 years ago they all wore long skirts, now wearing tight pants on a woman is allowed, maybe its more manly (because men traditionally wore pants) but its also sexy cuz u can see the outline of their ass. (And thats just jeans)
    Forget about the bikini and shit that just got invented 80 years ago. So yea, for the LSI women out there and stuff, theres just more freedom to wear what you want now, which is good, wear what you like. But women know what to do to attract men via appearance and that will never change so does it really matter what they wear? Fashion has always changed. Besides i guess some F men like more manly kind of women anyways (T).

    Also it just had to do with that woman being old as fuck. Women have more testosterone when theyre older (and uglier), so yea...

  22. #102
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baking bread
    TIM
    ESTp 7w8 Sx/Sp
    Posts
    3,323
    Mentioned
    212 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    Don't keep us waiting until the next episode!
    Lol classic

  23. #103
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    663
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, I don't really see a problem with tight jeans on attractive female arses. I also think female cops are hot. Every female cop I've met seems LSE.

    That said, there is something very sexy about women in those light, breezy dresses they tend to wear in the springtime.

  24. #104
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    6,164
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Weird View Post
    Yeah, I don't really see a problem with tight jeans on attractive female arses. I also think female cops are hot. Every female cop I've met seems LSE.

    That said, there is something very sexy about women in those light, breezy dresses they tend to wear in the springtime.
    LSE is a very male personality type. Both my mother and one of my sisters are LSE, and they basically operate as men.
    When a women gets that kind of personality type, there can be a huge mismatch between what she wants to do and what society expects her to do.

  25. #105
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    Maybe you're part of nature but I'm not. I'm definitely not inside an aquarium. Anyways, what do you think human beings were put on Earth for? Something that's simply transitory doesn't have any meaningful power or purpose and I think you should know that. I'm going to be the queen of humility here but I know more than most people would ever want to, so I should probably just not argue.
    Alright there Lois Lane, don't keep us waiting for the next article!

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  26. #106
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,178
    Mentioned
    931 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    There are no rational limits for breeding as the technology solved this problem before. The universe is enough place for all. Also in the past people lived in more material poverty but were not lesser happy - what shift material limits further than it seems. You can feel good without many things in your life, but you can't without love.
    There is a lack of love to people. Today egocentric ideology indoctrinated to masses leads to the hate to people and hence to born new ones. It's what is the real loss. It's part of peoples' nature the wish to born new people. Of healthy nature. Anything other is the pervertion which leads people to be unhappy.

    What is the sense in having more expensive things and more of them if you feel worse, lesser happy? When the love is lost, the inner harmony, the natural part of which is to born children. The egocentric ideology have stolen this from people. Also with more natural attitude - people could do more to have better material region. Many resources goes away due to egocentrism as people do not care about others as could and due to intersocial conflicts with this egocentrism.

    The peoples quantity is not the real problem. The perverion of peoples' psyche and socium by egocentric ideology - is the far more problem. While the talks about "there are too much of people" is more the rationalization of hate to people than other.

    I was born in other culture - USSR collectivism. It's easier for me to see the situation differently.
    You need to think to understand what I've said. Medias propaganda is not easy to overcome.
    I have nothing to add still.
    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    Maybe you're part of nature but I'm not. I'm definitely not inside an aquarium. Anyways, what do you think human beings were put on Earth for? Something that's simply transitory doesn't have any meaningful power or purpose and I think you should know that. I'm going to be the queen of humility here but I know more than most people would ever want to, so I should probably just not argue.
    You two should be fruitful and multiply.

    Genesis 1:26-28 King James Version (KJV)

    26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:[aliens?] and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
    Coeruleum was gently fashioned from fairy dust and then the holy spirit was used to inflate her lungs for the first time. Nothing to do with nature at all. In her you will find your holy angel, Sol.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  27. #107
    coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    Not Sh!t
    Posts
    1,983
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Alright there Lois Lane, don't keep us waiting for the next article!
    I've already shared things and people didn't understand, and also, it's not knowledge of events either ("Lois Lane.") When you don't share things, people do understand anyways. Now let's wait for the Lemurians to come out of their hidden city underground beneath Marianas Trench while the Atlantians direct the insignificant fates of this transitory race, Man. Then the Great Race of Yith shall finally destroy the Flying Polyps and inhabit their beetle bodies until the end of time, and the spirit creatures New Agers want to become can read their all-knowing books when they get bored of doing healings on grey aliens using immaterial fluidic crystals that have symbiotic consciousness and reflect colors outside the humanly-visible spectrum.

    (OK, I don't know exactly what the people in this conversation believe but it's probably weird fiction stuff like that.)
    Those who know, do. Those who can't, teach.

  28. #108
    Kids Turned Out Fine
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    3w4
    Posts
    9,077
    Mentioned
    711 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    androgyny is the new thang

  29. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    51
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Remiel View Post
    Nature is not subject to your morals.
    Nature is actually a primary source of morality. For example you are inclined not to kill other members of your species because this is not evolutionary. People that tended to kill other members of their species failed to reproduce and failed to thrive. I mean you can try to imagine nature as a state of chaos and war, a "who gives a shit anything goes" kind of thing but... nature is highly organized and it can be extremely punishing if you slip up. Nature is definitely something to fear. Modern people are insulated from these facts of course, they're just living in a fantasy land that man created ...while unconscious of the fact they're destroying themselves and the planet.
    Quote Originally Posted by lelelewomanwomanwoman View Post
    The social norms are pretty black and white now and there aren't very many attractive girly men, like I've seen like 1 or so in my entire life. Minus traps, but idk bout that. And the many gender movement has bad stigma attached.

    In Austin powers international man of mystery, austin powers tackled an older woman and exclaimed, "this is a man, baby!".

    I got to thinking that if Austin powers, who was from the past 1960s or so, was used to women who looked more feminine, and mistaken a woman in the modern era 1990s for a male in disguise. Are the women more manly looking now?
    Quote Originally Posted by Chae View Post
    androgyny is the new thang

    When you have a social structure that is very top heavy and difficult to climb you get the feminization of males. What happens is males are selected sexually based on their status (from an evolutionary standpoint). So when they all are stacking up at the bottom... and no longer see a path to climbing in status, they may give in and become submissive, give up, stop striving, become bitchified, strive for social value in immutable attributes like appearance, etc.. When you have a society that is very objectifying of women and gives them a ton of attention based solely on appearances, it hyperinflates their status in one sense while simultaneously the males are (at least attempting to) sexually degrading / humiliating them... you get masculinization of women. The women band together and become hardened against the males, and also begin to see the men as inherently beneath them in status. And they only associate with males a sense of tyrannical dominance displays mixed with needy inferiority. So the women start to see themselves as men and act like men. The extreme expression of this is the trans movement which you see in the West now.

    These are social problems (tilted heirarchy, objectification and degradation), alot of people say this is a good thing... It's a symptom of underlying problems. You could say it's the inevitable failing of modern society. That doesn't mean it's something you want to promote in the culture and smile about. You want people to be able to rise in status in society, and you don't want women being degraded and objectified.
    Last edited by cR4z3dr4T; 03-27-2019 at 04:02 AM.

  30. #110
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,317
    Mentioned
    229 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scholarlyhost View Post
    Nature is actually a primary source of morality. For example you are inclined not to kill other members of your species because this is not evolutionary. People that tended to kill other members of their species failed to reproduce and failed to thrive. I mean you can try to imagine nature as a state of chaos and war, a "who gives a shit anything goes" kind of thing but... nature is highly organized and it can be extremely punishing if you slip up. Nature is definitely something to fear. Modern people are insulated from these facts of course, they're just living in a fantasy land that man created ...while unconscious of the fact they're destroying themselves and the planet.




    When you have a social structure that is very top heavy and difficult to climb you get the feminization of males. What happens is males are selected sexually based on their status (from an evolutionary standpoint). So when they all are stacking up at the bottom... and no longer see a path to climbing in status, they may give in and become submissive, give up, stop striving, become bitchified, strive for social value in immutable attributes like appearance, etc.. When you have a society that is very objectifying of women and gives them a ton of attention based solely on appearances, it hyperinflates their status in one sense while simultaneously the males are (at least attempting to) sexually degrading / humiliating them... you get masculinization of women. The women band together and become hardened against the males, and also begin to see the men as inherently beneath them in status. And they only associate with males a sense of tyrannical dominance displays mixed with needy inferiority. So the women start to see themselves as men and act like men. The extreme expression of this is the trans movement which you see in the West now.

    These are social problems (tilted heirarchy, objectification and degradation), alot of people say this is a good thing... It's a symptom of underlying problems. You could say it's the inevitable failing of modern society. That doesn't mean it's something you want to promote in the culture and smile about. You want people to be able to rise in status in society, and you don't want women being degraded and objectified.
    Wow. a real 4w5 sx/sp....first one I seen in awhile.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •